Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a
neutral point of view. A contribution you made to
Nick Cohen appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our
core policies. Thank you.
Horselover Frost (
talk)
16:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary or your own
personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to
Harry's Place. Doing so violates Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.
Horselover Frost (
talk)
16:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Please do not continue to violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy, as you did with
this edit to
Harry's Place. If you continue to do so, you will be
blocked from editing.
Alansohn (
talk)
16:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Dear Mr Sohn. Please justify your claim to being neutral. As far as I can tell, the Harrys Place article is written by supporters and contributors to the blog, such as Peter Werner. All attempts by others to edit content are blocked, whereas supporters' edits are allowed, no matter how biased.
Sockpuppetry case
|
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HugoZHackenbusch for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Wuh Wuz Dat 22:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to
Harry's Place, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Wuh
Wuz
Dat
22:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
All attempts to make reasonable edits have been blocked by editors who are hardly neutral. The wikipedia article is a disgraceful piece of free advertising for Harrys Place.
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a
neutral point of view. A contribution you made to
Nick Cohen appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our
core policies. Thank you.
Horselover Frost (
talk)
16:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary or your own
personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to
Harry's Place. Doing so violates Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.
Horselover Frost (
talk)
16:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Please do not continue to violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy, as you did with
this edit to
Harry's Place. If you continue to do so, you will be
blocked from editing.
Alansohn (
talk)
16:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Dear Mr Sohn. Please justify your claim to being neutral. As far as I can tell, the Harrys Place article is written by supporters and contributors to the blog, such as Peter Werner. All attempts by others to edit content are blocked, whereas supporters' edits are allowed, no matter how biased.
Sockpuppetry case
|
|
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HugoZHackenbusch for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Wuh Wuz Dat 22:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you violate Wikipedia's
neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to
Harry's Place, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Wuh
Wuz
Dat
22:15, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
All attempts to make reasonable edits have been blocked by editors who are hardly neutral. The wikipedia article is a disgraceful piece of free advertising for Harrys Place.